Cases 21 - 30 of 291
Turner v. Getachew et al
as 1:2022cv03133
Plaintiff:
Robert D. Turner
Defendant:
Asresahegn Getachew, Keith K. Arnold, North Branch Correctional Institution and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights
Sundari Prasad v. Dylon Arnold
as 22-7290
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SUNDARI K. PRASAD
Defendant / Appellee:
DYLON B. ARNOLD, Comm. of VA and JUDGE C. HUTTON
Douglas Arnold v. Harold Clarke
as 22-7165
Petitioner / Appellant:
DOUGLAS WILLIAM ARNOLD
Respondent / Appellee:
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections
A.D. v. Demetro et al
as 2:2022cv00432
Plaintiff:
A. D.
Defendant:
Anthony Demetro, David Jones, Matthew Currence and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Freeman v. Arnold et al
as 9:2022cv03249
Petitioner:
Fred Freeman
Respondent:
Kelly B. Arnold, Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Deborah S. McKeown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 pr (Other)
Banks v. Mueller et al
as 1:2022cv03003
Plaintiff:
Arnold Ray Banks and Arnold R. Banks, Jr.
Defendant:
Steve Mueller, Jane Doe, Nurse Lydia and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
Arnold v. USA
as 3:2022cv00436
Petitioner:
Curtis Arnold
Respondent:
USA
Interested Party:
USA2255Group
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Prasad v. Arnold et al
as 3:2022cv00547
Plaintiff:
Sundari Karma Prasad
Defendant:
Dylon B. Arnold and Judge C. Hutton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Prasad v. Arnold et al
as 7:2022cv00470
Plaintiff:
Sundari Karma Prasad
Defendant:
Dylon B. Arnold and Judge C. Hutton
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas v. Hardee et al
as 5:2022ct03297
Plaintiff:
Arnold J. Thomas
Defendant:
Michael A. Hardee, Unit Management, Food Service Supervisor and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
